Re: ATOMS FOR PEACE 2 0 1 3

ohhhhh but that crowed, it went all the way back to the ferris wheel. In the 6 years of my attendance, ive never seen anything like it. And yeah, i can deff credit a lot of that to the 'wild sneak in' of 2010, but theres no way they put that on the outdoor again. If this single is any indication of what kind of album we're looking at.... plus a solid 7 months of promotion.... the reputation alone of the bands members, and their relationship w/ the festival.... i could probably muster up a few other selling points, but the fact is, and im not even a big big Thom Yorke fan, they would make a very good headliner.

Re: ATOMS FOR PEACE 2 0 1 3

Although the fact remains that It Rained All Night was one of my happiest moments ever at Coachella and I'm not even all that sure why. I wasn't on any drugs I can think of, the crowd was annoying as shit, we were way far back, but that fucking beat was impossible to resist. He could've played the shit for a half hour.

Originally Posted by amyzzz

Hannah, I don't know that pigs have big weiners, and my early 20's facination with dogs because of weiner size, I think. If that helps.

Re: ATOMS FOR PEACE 2 0 1 3

Originally Posted by sonofhal

They had a big crowd the year that there was 30k extra in the grounds. Does that make Phoenix headline material too?

yes, in a few years Phoenix will be a strong possibility. In fact some would already consider them to be a weak headliner. Argue, speculate all you want. The interest and crowd for Thom was much larger than the Gorillaz set. Im not sure why some would even argue against the idea of it, nor do i understand the need to call people dumb fucks for having an opinion. Its not going to be the name/idea alone... its going to take a lot of positive press, promotion, and a highly acclaimed album.

Re: ATOMS FOR PEACE 2 0 1 3

Originally Posted by Coachella Bound

yes, in a few years Phoenix will be a strong possibility. In fact some would already consider them to be a weak headliner. Argue, speculate all you want. The interest and crowd for Thom was much larger than the Gorillaz set. Im not sure why some would even argue against the idea of it, nor do i understand the need to call people dumb fucks for having an opinion. Its not going to be the name/idea alone... its going to take a lot of positive press, promotion, and a highly acclaimed album.

In all fairness, he didn't call you a dumb fuck because you have an opinion. He called you a dumb fuck because you've shown great aptitude for being a dumb fuck.

Originally Posted by RandyInHeaven

Devin - how does it feel to know that there are still more women in the world that would fuck me at this very moment than would fuck you?

Re: ATOMS FOR PEACE 2 0 1 3

AFP would not headline. But there's a difference between "would not headline" and "didn't have an impressive crowd." I don't care if people snuck in. Where was the Pavement sneak-in boost? Plenty of people didn't have huge crowds in 2010. Thom Yorke was the third name on Sunday, and arguably bigger to the common Coachella attendee than Gorillaz or Pavement. AFP had BY FAR the biggest outdoor crowd I've ever seen. I have no idea what would be second. They wouldn't headline but to act like "oh yeah their crowd wasn't that big" is simply incorrect.

For the record, tons of people have speculated Phoenix could headline...it's actually one of the more common names I've seen.

And that "thom yorke dump on stage" joke has to be the most unfunny, overused, annoying, stupid joke on these boards.

edit: in fact those thom yorke DJ sets like the one at MoMA over the weekend might be worse than a dump on stage. A good DJ he is not.

Re: ATOMS FOR PEACE 2 0 1 3

the 2010 AFP set was my second favorite show ever. I'm a huge radiohead fan and have seen radiohead twice and they're not even in my top 10 shows so I'm not just being biased. The energy of AFP was something else.

Also. Jack Johnson headlined so stfu about Thom Yorke not being able to headline. All arguments about the legitimacy of headliners went out the door with that one.

Re: ATOMS FOR PEACE 2 0 1 3

Would be all in for this. It's distinct enough where I don't really care that Yorke played last year with Radiohead. I am also in the camp that doesn't think they would headline, but rather would play opposite/semi-opposite the "headliner" on a "weak" headlining night (i.e. the Black Keys last year).

Re: ATOMS FOR PEACE 2 0 1 3

Originally Posted by Coachella Bound

thats the thing though.... theres no way they put that act on the outdoor again. Sub-headliner seems to be the more reasonable answer.

I mean...why not? Correct me if I'm wrong, but in 2010 there might have been more of an appetite for that kind of thing, particularly among more casual music fans. Radiohead hadn't released an album in several years (In Rainbow was late 2007, correct?), and hadn't made an appearance at Coachella since 2004. The band hadn't toured in about two years, so anything Radiohead related was going to be at a premium. The IDEA of Thom Yorke playing was a huge deal.

Radiohead are now wrapping up a massive tour where they hit pretty much every market, including major festivals. Their last album was (like it or not) considered by many to not be their strongest effort. It's entirely possible that the fever for anything and everything Radiohead related may not continue to extend to Atoms For Peace in the spring of 2013. Again, this could all be wrong. But the idea that AFP could be on the Outdoor against a headline-caliber act isn't really that farfetched, and to say "that won't ever happen" is foolish.